Except in this case the rule was created specifically to protect members of the senate from cries of racism.

When fascism and totalitarianism take over and the rules are written by bad people for bad purposes simply saying "rules are rules" is naive and dangerous.

Still waiting on some specific examples from you on how Obama "ruined" the country (or for you to admit you were wrong). Your words have no weight so long as you run away from the slightest hint of a counter argument. I can see why you like Mitch's move here, it's exactly the sort of thing you'd pull.

You fear words because you are wrong, Bob. If you stopped to pay attention you might actually have to reevaluate your position and you're too much of an intellectual coward to do that, aren't you? Prove me wrong, by the way, let's see an open discussion, rather than your usual drive-by commenting followed up by hiding in the basement from any cogent dissenting argument.

@transmorpher
i would say we disagree but i cant even say that.
you didn't counter ANYTHING i said,you just accused me of being dishonest.

which has been pretty much your position this entire thread.i thought i was doing you a solid by laying down some history,which helps explain some facets of radical islam.

notice my wording:facets.

do you realize that i taught comparative religion and cultural religious history?
do you realize just how foolish you appear to me right now?

you want to counter my argument....by not countering my argument,and implying i am being dishonest.

ok sweetheart,
i think i see the problem here.
YOU are seeing the dynamic through a singular lens.

you want to ignore the historical implications and simply focus on islam itself?
ok,that's fine.
i find it stupid,short sighted and incredibly biased,but whatever..

yoooou have an agenda to get to don't ya?

ok.
then let us just strip the dynamic of ALL historical implications and focus solely on islam itself.
(which is why you mentioned Maajid Nawaz, and Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Sam Harris, Hitchens )
you clever clever boy...
i see what you did there../ruffles hair.
you are SO adorable when you are being myopic and lazy!

so what would you like to discuss?
how islam is in desperate need of a reformation?
or maybe how the original intent of islam from a spiritual perspective was hi-jacked by his cousins and turned into a political conquest machine,that subjugated ...

you know what?
why am i bothering?
you have revealed yourself to be a condescending,sanctimonious know-nothing.who read a couple of books and thinks he 'get's it".

no dude..you read sam harris.

look man,
i am not here defending islam,because as religions go,islam is kinda shit.
but to ignore how neoliberalism and american interventionism have amplified,and worsened and already crappy situation.

that's not even intellectually dishonest.
that is just plain lazy.

whats next?
you gonna do some 'thought experiments" and try to argue that at least america's "intentions" were nobel?

you WERE! weren't you!!

and this little revisionist nugget "Those countries have had problems long before any western intervention."

oooh really?
because,unlike YOU,i actually know the history of that region.
so if you want we can compare how some cities and countries were considered "progressive" and even "liberal",and even some (granted,only a few) that were considered "secular" *gasp*.

how about this,instead of me repeatedly taking you to the woodshed to give ya some of that "learnin",how about you just go look up the history of kabul,afghanistan.

that's it.just one city.

and then come back and tell me that neoliberalism,colonialism and good old fashioned empire building hasn't been a major force in the rise in fundamentalism and radicalization in the middle east.

it looks like you really ARE going to make go all the way back to the dark ages!

and dude..seriously..hitchens ROCKED,but sam harris?
no..juuust no.
i don't do apologists as a counter argument.

edit:i will say that i agree with this "There are actual muslims (such as Maajid Nawaz)that say islam has a problem(especially particular strands of it), and it needs reform. Embracing the muslims who want reform is the only way forward."

you mean that islam may need a reformation?
*gasps*/clasps hands to face.
didn't i fucking already SAY that?

ah well,foiled by my pedantic ways.

Would that fly with you if Obama had said that to Christians that had completed the immigration process, or already immigrated but were on business outside the US? Just go somewhere else, you scare us. You would not accept it.

You do get that many people now 'banned' already lived here, right?
You do understand that those refugees already accepted went through an invasive 18-24 month vetting process while living in refugee camps with no jobs or schools, right?
You do understand that some who've completed that process and were accepted because they put their lives and their families lives in danger by working for America in, lets say Syria, are now denied permanently and their lives are now in danger from retaliation, right?
You do understand that those already accepted would have sold their homes and assets in their home countries, left their jobs, and in some cases purchased property in the US, right ?

If this were done by Obama, or to white Christians, you would be frothing at the mouth. Just wait until Canada bans white right wingers because you guys have now proven to be terrorists and lets see how you react. I seriously doubt it will be with calm patience and an 'oh well, we can just go elsewhere' attitude.

Wut?

Edit: Oh I see what you mean now. It's because of how the video has been cut together. "She" made sense in the original lecture as a follow on from what he was talking about before.

I can see why it seems funny in isolation though now I've noticed it.

Nice to see you. You are thought of well and often.

Merry Christmas to you and yours.

Happy New Year, too.

I see what you did there!

@Stormsinger

I do have more authoritarian impulses than do you, obviously. Not the word I would have chosen -- I would have said -- I trust people with deep knowledge of a situation and am willing to follow their lead.

I disagree that I am setting up a false binary choice.

Although that is the basic difference between our positions -- you see a binary choice. I see a threat to our democracy the likes of which I have never seen in my lifetime, plus a big threat to the gains made towards progressive values that we have been inching towards.

My proof? There are floods of thoughtful reasonable conservative thinkers who are appalled by the man and see clearly the threat that Trump poses. They are patriots enough to turn their back on their own party. I have never ever seen this in my lifetime.

This isn't a false binary choice. It isn't binary at all. There is no equivalency between Trump and Clinton.

Trump must not become president. It is imperative.

However, you don't see that. You have company in not seeing that.

If Trump wins, please remember this convo. It will be a disaster if he is president.

Are you lost in the world like me?
And the systems have failed are you free?
All the things are lost can you see?
Are you lost in the world like me?
Like me


Look hard the city is gone
Black days and a dying sun
Dream a dream of dark lit air
Just for a minute you’ll find me there
So look harder and you’ll find
Forty ways it leaves us blind
I need a better place to burn beside the lines

Come on and let me try
Are you lost in the world like me?
And the systems have failed are you free?
All the things are lost can you see?
Are you lost in the world like me?
Like me

So (???) in the city it’s dawn
Dropping knives and a dying sun
Salted love in the dark lit air
Just for a minute I’ll find you there
So look harder and you’ll find
The forty ways it leaves us blind
I need a better way to burn beside the lines

Come on and let me try

Are you lost in the world like me?
And the systems have failed are you free?
All the things are lost can you see?
Are you lost in the world like me?
Like me

Are you lost in the world like me?
And the systems have failed are you free?
All the things are lost can you see?
Are you lost in the world like me?
Like me

Alternate title: How to see if you have core strength.

I see what you did there!

Embed is not working, so:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MFVXsnq230c

If you want to see if you would float.

Did you mention my name so I would get notification....no...you talked shit about me to someone else while omitting anything that would notify me you were talking shit about me.
I'm not sitting here hitting refresh on this thread looking to see if you replied or commented.
You aren't so bright yourself, are you?

Yeah, keep changing the topic and ignoring my statements.
Ours is not a pure secular democracy, even though it was intended to be one, so not as different from a theocracy as you suggest by far. (that does not mean there's no difference, it means you imply they are near opposites) Perhaps if the clear intent of the founders was the rule, we would be, but it's not.

Try having a religious discussion in the deep south as an atheist and see if you don't feel at risk for your life. In public, maybe surviveable, but get religious people together where they feel 'safe', you'll see the bile and vitriol for the 'other' come out in spades. Hitchens knew full well it was not gone, and that the 'other' was not safe, and that religion doesn't always wear the smiley face even today.
Bye.

I can see what you're saying. I would love to see an interview with him discussing what his life used to be like and how he made the decision and financial outlay to begin making his videos; however, I think that now that his channel is up and running and if he gets a video out every month that's more than $40,000 income per year and I think that would be enough to support all his expenses. He probably has a camera like a GoPro (~$500), does his own editing on his own computer ($2500?) and would still have money left over for all the rest.